Simplify Uploads by only sending Pass results
Change-Id: Iffa95584bd3417391704707811cc9ef21527dc60 storyboard: https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/108
This commit is contained in:
parent
e92daff4f0
commit
3564859f03
129
specs/approved/simplify-uploads-by-only-sending-pass-results.rst
Executable file
129
specs/approved/simplify-uploads-by-only-sending-pass-results.rst
Executable file
@ -0,0 +1,129 @@
|
|||||||
|
=============================================
|
||||||
|
Simplify Uploads by only sending Pass results
|
||||||
|
=============================================
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Blueprint: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/refstack/+spec/pass-only-uploads
|
||||||
|
Storyboard: https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/108
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
As part of helping the community accept the publication of results, refstack
|
||||||
|
test uploads should default to only PASS results. We are NOT uploading skips
|
||||||
|
or errors. This aligns with the interop objective because we want have a
|
||||||
|
positive assertion.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Problem description
|
||||||
|
===================
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Because fail results often include sensitive information it has been a pain
|
||||||
|
point for some of our early adopters to upload results to a foundation
|
||||||
|
controlled database. Since refstack really only cares about the things that
|
||||||
|
pass, we'll just parse the results and leave the fails out.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Proposed change
|
||||||
|
===============
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
This would involve using the subunit parsing code inside the tester. We would
|
||||||
|
run the parser on the subunit before uploading the results to the api.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
We'll want to have a non-default option to send all data. Because I am sure
|
||||||
|
that some folks will want to use refstack internally for real debugging and
|
||||||
|
test regression.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
If a user tries to submit results to the public api server (Regardless of what
|
||||||
|
the non-defaulting option is set to.). It will either produce an error (which I
|
||||||
|
don't think is as useful) or it will just scrub the results anyways.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Alternatives
|
||||||
|
------------
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
We could take the full upload and do the processing server side to accomplish
|
||||||
|
the DefCore objective; however, that does not avoid the data leak issue.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Data model impact
|
||||||
|
-----------------
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
None
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
REST API impact
|
||||||
|
---------------
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
None
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Security impact
|
||||||
|
---------------
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
This change addresses security concerns. as far as I can tell it will not
|
||||||
|
create any new ones.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Notifications impact
|
||||||
|
--------------------
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
It should mention that results are being scrubbed in the on screen log messages.
|
||||||
|
so that it's clear on every action.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Other end user impact
|
||||||
|
---------------------
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
None
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Performance Impact
|
||||||
|
------------------
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
This will slow down the tester but not by a lot. However it will also speed up
|
||||||
|
the upload of the results since they will be trimmed.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Other deployer impact
|
||||||
|
---------------------
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
None
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Developer impact
|
||||||
|
----------------
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
This could potentially be a maintance problem moving forward as we move the
|
||||||
|
subunit parsing utils into tempest then move the tester into its own repo.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
It will require that someone stays on top of things durring those changes to avoid
|
||||||
|
duplication of code.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Implementation
|
||||||
|
==============
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Assignee(s)
|
||||||
|
-----------
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Primary assignee:
|
||||||
|
dlenwell
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Other contributors:
|
||||||
|
catherine wrote the parsing utils. So some support might be needed.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Work Items
|
||||||
|
----------
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
The tester already has a stubbed out function for this code. Just needs
|
||||||
|
to be filled in.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Dependencies
|
||||||
|
============
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
None
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Testing
|
||||||
|
=======
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
None
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Documentation Impact
|
||||||
|
====================
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
It should be written down that we aren't uploading fails. So its known to
|
||||||
|
operators and they don't have to be concerned about security leaks.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
But outside of that I don't see the need for documentation.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
References
|
||||||
|
==========
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
N/A
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user